I actually prefer this real world outlook where people who have conflicts or who don't perform "resign" or get fired - as opposed to the current political climate where it takes foreign hackers to expose blatant corruption in order to force a resignation in the DNC and no one in the executive branch gets held accountable for anything. (Oh you had a private meeting with the former president and husband of a presidential candidate under investigation by the FBI less than one week prior to the announcement of no charges? No problem).

The key attack on the Clinton's Corruption is that a big part of the 4 billion dollars the cash laundering operation hid as a charitycame from foreign governments at the time she handled their business from the USA's side using powers to regulate them as Secretary of State. Those were our powers in her fiduciary hands that she then used Bill to sell to the highest bidder.

So the small time Manafort money laundering operations with Russian manipulated Ukrainian elections 5 years ago is live ammo to defend Clinton's using the "everybody does it " card.

Ergo: all ties with Manafort had to be thrown overboard to clear the decks for action.

No surprise to anyone who has ever managed a large project. There are stages to the project and specialists to handle the implementation of the project. Just like building a high rise building, or constructing an airport, or even building a home, there are stages and specialists and and overseer or coordinator.

A campaign is the same thing. You have the beginning stage, being the primaries. It takes a specialized skill set for that phase. Lewandowski headed up that phase. Then the Convention. This took a completely different skill set to get through that morass. Manafort was the man for that. Once that phase is done, it is onto the General election and Advertising phase. Yet another completely different skill set and Trump brings on a new group of "contractors" or specialist.

Trump is the General Contractor/or coordinator. The other guys are the the Sub-Contractors. When you build a house, you don't keep the foundation contractor on the payroll when you are putting the paint on the walls or placing sod in the front yard. The foundation contractor's work is done. That would be incredibly wasteful of money and create chaos on the job site.

You hire the people who are effective to do the job at the time that part of the project is needed and then move onto finish the project with the next group of people.

There is nothing mystical or mysterious or drama laden about it. It is business.

People who want to make a big deal about this and who try to make it into a big drama have obviously never worked on any type of large project.

DBQ I've often enjoyed your comments but IMHO you are spinning here. There's nothing to support the idea that this was a planned transition and a lot to support the alternate hypothesis that the Trump campaign is in crisis mode. I do t see why people who have supported Trump can't at least admit that he may be in over his head- you might think he can learn from mistakes and that the changes indicate that he's doing so, but to pretend this is all part of a plan is a bit absurd.

For my part, the pro-Russian stuff has creeped me out even more than other things that have bothered me about Trump, and I can only hope that this move bodes well for Trump pivoting on some of those issues, to the extent that he still might have a chance at getting elected.

Trump got spooked by the investigation into Manafort and he's feeling the heat. That's good. Hopefully the Intel briefing wasn't too in depth. His daughter Ivanka sat in on it after just days before being on vacation with Putin's girlfriend in Croatia. I'm sure the RNC is giving a closer look to the pro Russia change they made to their platform, which Trump claims he knew nothing about, but the RNC claims was pushed by his campaign. The Russian connection: Trump sure spoke glowingly about Putin enough times. Donald Jr. Said they did a great deal of business with Russia. Trump depended on Russian financiers (Russian Mafia) when western banks wouldn't touch him. How much money of favors does he owe those Russian financiers?

For my part, the pro-Russian stuff has creeped me out even more than other things that have bothered me about Trump, and I can only hope that this move bodes well for Trump pivoting on some of those issues, to the extent that he still might have a chance at getting elected.

The pro-Russian stuff is one of the core cases of the media being completely in the bag. John Podesta is several times more tied to Russia than Trump and he is also Hillary's campaign chairman.

Why is Manafort the cause celebre when Podesta runs a firm that is a major Russian bank's lobbying firm?

Trump got spooked by the investigation into Manafort and he's feeling the heat.

Why continue ducking Hillary's campaign chairman running a firm lobbying on behalf of a major Russian bank with extremely close ties to the Kremlin?

Trump sure spoke glowingly about Putin enough times.

Who gave them an "accidentally mistranslated" (because Russian interpreters in the State Dept don't exist, apparently)? Who served under a President promising more flexibility with them if he won? Who is the standard bearer for a party that mocked Romney for calling Russia a rival?

Trump depended on Russian financiers (Russian Mafia) when western banks wouldn't touch him. How much money of favors does he owe those Russian financiers?

Less than Hillary and her cronies. Hey, maybe Podesta's group is lobbying for the financial interests in question?

Blogger mockturtle said...DBQ has it right. Trump's campaign has never been in 'crisis mode', no matter how persistently the media may chant the mantra.

8/19/16, 10:50 AM

I've got a theory about this. The media is pretty much just gossip when it comes to the campaigns. They know somebody who knows somebody. Since most of the media are Democrats and move in liberal circles, they rely on those few Republican "insiders" that they know for news on Republican campaigns. This year, however, a lot of those MSM Republicans are #NeverTrump.

So, for example, Jake Tappers and Bill Kristol are having coffee in the break room and Kristol says, "I've got it from my source in the Trump campaign that they are having a total meltdown. Crisis mode!" And then Jake reports, "unnamed sources close to the Trump campaign say they are having a meltdown."

Tapper believes Kristol because he is their go to guy for the past 20 years all things Republican.

It doesn't occur to him that maybe #Nevertrump isn't the best source of information concerning the Trump campaign.

Regardless, notice how much information about the Trump campaign is coming from unnamed sources. Also, be careful about this. They don't always call them unnamed sources. Sometimes its more generic, like "people in the trump camp" or something equally non-specific.

Damikesc- I'm sufficiently convinced that both major party candidates have ties to Russia that I find unacceptable. Now what? Who is tha alternative? At this point I'm pretty sure im going to vote down ticket (R) and leave a blank for POTUS, and pray a lot.

I don't think Donald Trump is in the habit of panicking and here there is no reason for him to do so.He has already won. This campaign is already one for the history books and he has done it at very low cost and without risking any part of D.J. Trump's Far-flung Enterprises, which, really being his life's work, presumably is where his heart lies.For the Donald, running for president is more like some other billionaire dabbling in space flights or drilling water wells and distributing condoms in Africa. It is fun, but not essential to his life.

OTOH, I see that TV advertising is way down compared to previous election cycles and I imagine the panic felt in TV industry is shared by the AGW scamsters, eco-warriors, etc. and so forth across the country, not just Democrat politicians.

The media seems unconcerned that the State Dept has admitted that the money was a ransom for the prisoners with Iran.

Damikesc- I'm sufficiently convinced that both major party candidates have ties to Russia that I find unacceptable. Now what? Who is tha alternative? At this point I'm pretty sure im going to vote down ticket (R) and leave a blank for POTUS, and pray a lot.

I'll likely vote for Trump because the media won't treat him as they treated Obama and would treat Hillary and Republicans in Congress are WAY more willing to fight a "Republican" President than a Democrat.

Nice Hagar... since Trump's won, declare victory and go home... and i'm guessing we'll never see the real cost of his 'campaign' such as it was since it was mostly financed by the 'little' people as are most of his business endeavors... someone is always left holding the bag with him...I am not a troll I am not Laslo..

@ DBQ 1014 My sentiments exactly. If things aren't working the way you want, and you are a hands-on manager, you change personnel. From everything I have read Trump has accomplished a major upgrade in his staffing. I doubt that Hillary is sharp enough at this point to know whether she is being well served or not. Rasmussen's latest poll has Hillary up by only 2 points. I would not bet the ranch on that poll, but if Hillary should fall behind - and the meat of the campaign is still to come - you can bet there will be some heads rolling at her headquarters too.

From the reaction at the WaPo I would say that they are a bit upset by this change. Manafort was going to be a target and, with the anti-Hillary ad campaign I hope is coming, Trump can't afford to have any targets around not named Trump.

I see that TV advertising is way down compared to previous election cycles

Television advertising for the political candidates is the technology and tactics of the last century. Sure....maybe some people watch television live.... but the majority of people either stream their content, dvr/record, watch on the net and otherwise just zip through the advertising or pause and skip. Spending millions and millions of dollars on TV ads is really a waste of money.

The old mossbacks and RINO dinosaurs just don't get it. You can't run a campaign as if it is 1980 or even 1990 anymore. Trump gets it. The alternate methods of contact are more productive AND less expensive. Social Media, You Tube viral videos, Twitter etc.

Phone bank calling is also a dead or dying technique. I have caller ID and it not only shows up on my phone, but also right on the TV feed if I'm using the satellite to watch, even a pre recorded show. If I don't know you, I'm not answering. If I accidentally pick up, I'm hanging up. People don't WANT to be called, pestered or hounded on their cell phones or land lines (which are increasingly rare)

Expensive flyers, begging for money are also a huge waste of campaign funds. I saved up the flyers from the last election and the crap that was sent from Romney and every other bozo running for office filled up several cardboard boxes. I just wanted to see HOW much. Currently, I just toss it at the PO. Even though my husband sent money to Trump, we have not received ANY annoying flyers from him. Yes from some other PACs. But. those are garbage fodder.. Just a thank you card and a small bumper sticker. I really appreciate the tact in leaving us the eff alone. Thanks Trump :-)

Of course, there will still be the traditional advertising on TV, but more strategically placed and much less. Anything else is a waste of money.

This new guy from BreitBart, as I understand it, will be heading up the NEW media advertising campaign. Just another specialist at the time needed for the project.

Failure to adapt is fatal to dinosaurs. The #neverTrump GOP still trying desperately to hold onto their old brand and the Dems still trying to pass themselves off as the party of the working class and minorities.

(1) Trump decides the man he hired to get him the nomination at the Republican convention is not the man/woman he needs to win the general election. - This might actually constitute a demonstration of good judgement.

Replacing a campaign manager once during a campaign, sure, maybe. But Manafort was already number two after Lewandowski. At some point if the "contractor" keeps replacing his "subs", it's time to realize that he didn't do due diligence when he hired them.

If the Trump campaign staff are all like building subcontractors, does that mean that they would need to go through a series of ruinous lawsuits to get any payment from The Donald?

Sure. Of course. If they had an actual contract and they didn't get paid, they could sue and they should sue.

However, most subs on jobs get paid partially or mostly up front and are not working by the hour. They bid the job and do the work that they are contracted to do and then find another contract. They don't hang around until the end of the project. If the sub hasn't done his job, then he also doesn't get paid the rest of the contract and can be sued himself for breach. You don't know much about this stuff do you?

So what exactly are the specialties of these hires supposed to be, DBQ? They've been hired for the same position, so I presume you believe that the job description changes with different phases of the campaign. Care to flesh put this theory and explain why a new person is needed?

Replacing the leadership of an organization is an incredibly disruptive event, and in a campaign- which although it seems endless to those of us suffering through it, is really a project with a relatively short life span- it makes no sense to keep reshuffling.

Actually now that I think about it, the analogy of contractor and subs is faulty. This would be more repeatedly replacing project managers over the course of one major project. You don't hire specialized PMs for different phases of a project-their expertise is management, and they see it through from start to finish (this is my hubs wheelhouse, by the way, so I have. Some exposure to it- in fact when he started his own venture a couple of years ago, his previous employer gave him a very lucrative deal to stay on and finish a project, so that he was essentially working two full time jobs for a while, because the continuity was that important.)

OK....you wanna talk contracting. My husband and I are also contractors and deal with subs. Before becoming a financial advisor, I was a commercial lender in the 1980'- 1990's dealing with construction project loans as well as agricultural loans. Dealing with the various draws of funds and inspection processes of the project and more importantly making the decision on whether we were going to lend or not in the first place.

And YES, you do change project managers or sub managers/contractors when the phase of the construction or project changes. As the project progresses those portions of the project are done and you no longer need that person in that capacity. You still have an overall manager, which in this case is likely Trump or a Trump + advisory panel. Probably his family who are also well versed in projects and construction.

Building a high rise, shopping mall or any other large project consists of various stages or various sub projects.

We can also compare the process to a large corporation where you have a CEO and a CFO. Those positions remain, generally, fairly stable. However, you may have a purchasing manager. Someone to oversee expansion in other countries or states. Advertising projects. R&D. On and on.

Just because you decided to hire a new Advertising project manager and you no longer need an expansion manager, doesn't mean your corporation is falling apart. Quite the contrary.

This feeds the narrative the press likes that trump is off the rails. Maybe. But it does nothing to change those of us that plan on voting for him as a protest. Are there really so few of us? And is Hillary electoral strength so academic at this point that she no longer has to campaign? I kind of doubt it.

Blogger Hagar said...and DBQ, stick to your last. Also Mr. Stanley. Neither one of you knows the construction industry and how it works.

8/19/16, 12:50 PM

This is sorta funny because they both do.

Actually now that I think about it, the analogy of contractor and subs is faulty. This would be more repeatedly replacing project managers over the course of one major project. You don't hire specialized PMs for different phases of a project-their expertise is management, and they see it through from start to finish

I'm not sure this is an analogy so much as it is relating to Trump's experience. Trump is the PM. Manafort, Lewandowski and all the rest are subs.

DBQ, all I can say is that that doesn't mesh with the experiences of my husband, who has been building industrial and commercial projects in the range of hundreds of billions in price for about 25 years. The continuity of the management team is so important that transitions are avoided whenever possible. One of hubs early employers had built a niche by being able to run entire projects while also being able to handle one specialty, refrigeration- to avoid the kind of transition you are talking about.

But for the sake of argument, assuming there is some overriding plan, what do you say are the functions filled by these new team members that couldn't be accomplished by the former ones?

DBQ @ 1315 Continue to agree with you. Another good example of matching talent to need is the NFL. I am most familiar with the Patriots where there seems to be an ongoing effort to maximize the capabilities needed for the team to reach its goal. Most of us think it all depends on the "high-skill" players, but with the Pats, and I am sure other teams, there seems to be a continuing effort to find the best combination of players - as a team - for the purpose, whether it is at quarterback or one of the guys who runs down under kicks. I happen to like Trump's active management style - but you already know I will vote for him come hell or high water.

I'm not sure this is an analogy so much as it is relating to Trump's experience. Trump is the PM. Manafort, Lewandowski and all the rest are subs.

I think it's possible to see it that way, but I also think it's a faulty way of seeing Trump. His career has been in deal making, not management. These are two sets of people in real estate development, involving people of entirely different skill sets.

@C Stanley You make good points. The thing to remember is that, unlike some of the robots we have had running (McCain and Obama come to mind), Trump is his own project manager with his kids as the project team. Although his support team may change the controlling group remains the same.

Charlie Sykes had a pretty entertaining interview with Ben Shapiro this morning. You can retrieve it online. 9am cst

Shapiro worked for Bannon at Breitbart and has VERY strong opinions of the man. Hilarious, if not scary.

I find it hard to take anything Breitbart, run by Bannon, seriously since they were 100% all in that P Nehlen was going to smoke P Ryan in the primary. At least the Donald struck a new tone last night. Can he keep it up?

Plus Belling is filling for Rush today. I prefer the other Mark when Rush is away.

@C Stanley 1412 I get the impression that Trump is a pretty hands-on guy as well as deal maker. If he's not a hands-on guy then he has been pretty good at hiring people capable of completing his many deals. That is a pretty rare talent in itself.

CStanley said...Replacing a campaign manager once during a campaign, sure, maybe. But Manafort was already number two after Lewandowski. At some point if the "contractor" keeps replacing his "subs", it's time to realize that he didn't do due diligence when he hired them.

8/19/16, 12:38 PM

Yeah! Like Abraham Lincoln, that piece of shit! Firing all those generals just because they didn't win! Where was Abe's due diligence, huh? I bet Jefferson Davis never fired anybody!

Abraham Lincoln's Letter to Major General Joseph Hookerwww.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/hooker.htmJoseph Hooker, called "Fighting Joe," was the third in a succession of commanding Union generals President Lincoln appointed in his search for victories during ...

Continuity of a company, project, campaign is important. Continuity and control comes from the top. The CEO (Trump) who devises policy, picks the direction of the company and then delegates to subs or department heads who then delegate etc. When the focus of the company changes or the project increment (for example the convention push by the political insider) is completed a smart CEO will change personnel as that part of the project is over. It is pointless to keep people on the payroll whose job is no longer existent.

You ask if this is a plus and as a person who has had to analyze businesses financials, tax returns to decide if they are loan worthy....maybe not in the billions (I know you corrected yourself, just a little kidding here) but in the millions, the ability of management or the business owner to be able to effectively use his/her resources is a huge plus in my analysis.

Trump is running a lean campaign and to keep people on who have fulfilled their purpose OR as pointed out were trending to be a liability is a smart business move. There is no doubt that the media were gear up and salivating to attack Trump with the Manafort/Russia smears. The smart business owner recognizes liabilities as well as assets.

Because she is simply the public face of her coterie, & the team really runs things. It's they who should be firing her. "But what about Debbie Wasserman Schutlz?" Well, she wasn't part of HRC's coterie, & what happened to her after she was fired from the DNC? She got hired by the Clinton campaign!

Clintonistas will say she has vetted her team over years & years & has assembled a cracker-jack team. Right, like the team that had her lose to a junior senator with no name recognition from Illinois.

If you think I'm wrong, go read the Wikileaks State Dept emails. It's not what's there that's incriminating. It's what not there. There's no evidence of any direction, leadership, drive, ideological passion, nothing. She & her team sat at State with their thumbs up their asses. Go look & tell me I'm wrong.

@Dust Bunny Queen said...If the Trump campaign staff are all like building subcontractors, does that mean that they would need to go through a series of ruinous lawsuits to get any payment from The Donald?

However, most subs on jobs get paid partially or mostly up front and are not working by the hour. They bid the job and do the work that they are contracted to do and then find another contract. They don't hang around until the end of the project. If the sub hasn't done his job, then he also doesn't get paid the rest of the contract and can be sued himself for breach. You don't know much about this stuff do you?

The trick part of the question relates to how long Donald Trump takes to pay vendors. Back in the mid 90's, I had the misfortune of having to deal with the unilateral Trump decision to run his payments out 150+ days to suppliers. We put up with it for about three months and then turned off credit terms to the his casinos. I had Trump purchasing agents begging for repair parts, offering "more business' in exchange for service. It was a pleasure indeed, to say "no," but it took more than a year to finally get paid.

Interestingly, he had already put Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza & Casino, and The Plaza Hotel under Chapter 11 by that time - so he had not changed his stripes despite these business failures and he was in violation of court orders to remain current on his debts while under bankruptcy protection. Whoda thunk it!

"There are eight million stories in the naked city; this has been one of them."

It looks like the Republican establishment will have to reconcile their differences with Trump after all. Then again, they may choose Obama's heir apparent and cross their fingers that she will maintain or progress his status quo.

As to stress, there really are two types of people in the world, worriers, and non-worriers. Crooked Hillary is the one, and Trump the other. Sometimes the one does better, and sometimes the other does. I am surrounded by worriers, mostly female. And, realistically, the older they get, the more they worry. Crooked Hillary, besides being a micro-manager, is a worrier, and that doesn't help her health issues one bit. Why else does she have a private physician following her around with an injector for Valium to combat her seizures? I would not be surprised if her health completely fell apart if she ever gets seriously behind in the polls. Or had to face a real issue as President, like 9/11, Bay of Pigs, etc. why isn't she down in LA right now? My guess, excuses by her surrogates aside, is that it would be too stressful for her.

Of course, that requires that Crooked Hillary actually is told and understands that she has fallen behind. She is famously intolerant of bad news, making the bearers of bad news regret such. We are apparently talking screaming abuse, meltdowns, and likely now health issues. Which probably means that her closest aides and minions would likely keep any bad polling news from her as low nag as they could.